Alexander Antigua-Made, Sabrina Nguyen, Ali Rashidi, Wen-Pin Chen, Argyrios Ziogas, Gelareh Sadigh
{"title":"使用决策辅助工具的患者完成肺癌筛查的情况:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Alexander Antigua-Made, Sabrina Nguyen, Ali Rashidi, Wen-Pin Chen, Argyrios Ziogas, Gelareh Sadigh","doi":"10.1007/s10552-025-01987-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Utilization of lung cancer screening (LCS) among eligible patients remains low at 16% in 2022. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we assessed the (a) LCS completion rate, and (b) intention to complete LCS, among patients who receive patient decision aids (PDAs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched for articles published in English between 1 January 2011, and 28 February 2023. Two independent reviewers selected randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies that reported PDA interventions targeting either LCS completion rate or intention to complete LCS. Quality appraisal and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute quality assessment tool. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen studies with 2,277 total participants (51.5% male) were included. The pooled LCS completion rate across all follow-up periods (range, 1-6 months) was 40% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15-65%) with an I<sup>2</sup> of 97% for heterogeneity. Pooled intention to complete LCS among patients who received PDA across all follow-up periods (same day to 3 months) was 57% (95% CI, 34% to 80%) with significant heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>) of 96% (p < 0.0001). No publication bias was identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LCS completion and intention to complete LCS among patients who use PDAs is high. Our findings support the need to implement PDAs in clinical practice which could further facilitate shared decision-making and improve LCS uptake among eligible patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":9432,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Causes & Control","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lung cancer screening completion among patients using decision aids: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Antigua-Made, Sabrina Nguyen, Ali Rashidi, Wen-Pin Chen, Argyrios Ziogas, Gelareh Sadigh\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10552-025-01987-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Utilization of lung cancer screening (LCS) among eligible patients remains low at 16% in 2022. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we assessed the (a) LCS completion rate, and (b) intention to complete LCS, among patients who receive patient decision aids (PDAs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched for articles published in English between 1 January 2011, and 28 February 2023. Two independent reviewers selected randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies that reported PDA interventions targeting either LCS completion rate or intention to complete LCS. Quality appraisal and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute quality assessment tool. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen studies with 2,277 total participants (51.5% male) were included. The pooled LCS completion rate across all follow-up periods (range, 1-6 months) was 40% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15-65%) with an I<sup>2</sup> of 97% for heterogeneity. Pooled intention to complete LCS among patients who received PDA across all follow-up periods (same day to 3 months) was 57% (95% CI, 34% to 80%) with significant heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>) of 96% (p < 0.0001). No publication bias was identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LCS completion and intention to complete LCS among patients who use PDAs is high. Our findings support the need to implement PDAs in clinical practice which could further facilitate shared decision-making and improve LCS uptake among eligible patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Causes & Control\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Causes & Control\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-025-01987-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Causes & Control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-025-01987-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:2022年符合条件的患者中肺癌筛查(LCS)的使用率仍然很低,为16%。在本系统综述和荟萃分析中,我们评估了接受患者决策辅助(pda)治疗的患者的LCS完成率和完成LCS的意愿。方法:检索2011年1月1日至2023年2月28日期间发表的英文文章,检索PubMed、Cochrane、Scopus、CINAHL和Web of Science。两名独立评论者选择了随机对照试验和前瞻性队列研究,这些研究报告了PDA干预措施针对LCS完成率或完成LCS的意图。质量评价和数据提取由2名审稿人使用国家心脏、肺和血液研究所质量评估工具独立完成。采用随机效应模型进行meta分析。报告遵循系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目。结果:纳入13项研究,共2277名参与者(51.5%为男性)。所有随访期(1-6个月)LCS完成率为40%(95%置信区间[CI], 15-65%),异质性I2为97%。在所有随访期间(同一天至3个月),接受PDA的患者完成LCS的总意向为57% (95% CI, 34%至80%),显著异质性(I2)为96% (p)。结论:使用PDA的患者完成LCS和完成LCS的意向很高。我们的研究结果支持在临床实践中实施pda的必要性,这可以进一步促进共同决策,并提高符合条件的患者对LCS的吸收。
Lung cancer screening completion among patients using decision aids: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Purpose: Utilization of lung cancer screening (LCS) among eligible patients remains low at 16% in 2022. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we assessed the (a) LCS completion rate, and (b) intention to complete LCS, among patients who receive patient decision aids (PDAs).
Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched for articles published in English between 1 January 2011, and 28 February 2023. Two independent reviewers selected randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies that reported PDA interventions targeting either LCS completion rate or intention to complete LCS. Quality appraisal and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute quality assessment tool. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses guidelines.
Results: Thirteen studies with 2,277 total participants (51.5% male) were included. The pooled LCS completion rate across all follow-up periods (range, 1-6 months) was 40% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15-65%) with an I2 of 97% for heterogeneity. Pooled intention to complete LCS among patients who received PDA across all follow-up periods (same day to 3 months) was 57% (95% CI, 34% to 80%) with significant heterogeneity (I2) of 96% (p < 0.0001). No publication bias was identified.
Conclusions: LCS completion and intention to complete LCS among patients who use PDAs is high. Our findings support the need to implement PDAs in clinical practice which could further facilitate shared decision-making and improve LCS uptake among eligible patients.
期刊介绍:
Cancer Causes & Control is an international refereed journal that both reports and stimulates new avenues of investigation into the causes, control, and subsequent prevention of cancer. By drawing together related information published currently in a diverse range of biological and medical journals, it has a multidisciplinary and multinational approach.
The scope of the journal includes: variation in cancer distribution within and between populations; factors associated with cancer risk; preventive and therapeutic interventions on a population scale; economic, demographic, and health-policy implications of cancer; and related methodological issues.
The emphasis is on speed of publication. The journal will normally publish within 30 to 60 days of acceptance of manuscripts.
Cancer Causes & Control publishes Original Articles, Reviews, Commentaries, Opinions, Short Communications and Letters to the Editor which will have direct relevance to researchers and practitioners working in epidemiology, medical statistics, cancer biology, health education, medical economics and related fields. The journal also contains significant information for government agencies concerned with cancer research, control and policy.